The reports of late around the increases in anti-Semitic reporting have primarily centred on Palestine, with Andrew Gilligan for instance, attempting to forge a link between the rise in attacks and Muslims Islam.
This came to a more emphatic, anti-Muslim assertion made by a Jew amongst the audience on BBC’s Question Time (05/02/2015), who stated that (at 57 minutes),
“There is a strong correlation between the rise of Muslims in Britain, and the rise of anti-Semitism… we don’t how many come from Muslims and how many don’t, but I suspect, there is a very strong relationship.”
The assertion was calmly made as though it was a statement of fact, yet it was admitted that the actual figures were not known. An unsubstantiated attack on the Muslim minority, no less.
In my piece on Gilligan, I highlighted how Gilligan focussed entirely on Muslims and Muslim behaviour. He also dragged in Muslim organisations and individuals in what was a Salafi-bashing piece, a nod to RICU directives, presumably. After reading Gilligan’s propaganda material, it would be understandable why the gentlemen in the audience relayed his anti-Muslim thoughts in the manner he did.
In demonstrating Gilligan’s blatant anti-Muslim bias, I also noted, with caution, as the cited report in Gilligan’s propaganda had not actually been published, that figures up until the first half of 2014 were for the most part linked to or motivated by the far-right. This was completely ignored by Gilligan.
Now that the Community Support Trust (CST) report on anti-Semitism has been published it is worth revisiting the figures to ascertain once again whether Gilligan’s singular focus on Muslims was warranted.
According to the report, physical descriptions are indicative, not evidence of religious convictions, due to the subjective nature of the reporting. Police figures remove such attributes before providing the metrics to CST. Physical description of the offender was obtained in 340 out of the 1,168 incidents recorded by CST. 153 out of the 340 (45%) were described as white (north and south European), constituting the biggest class of anti-Semitic “attackers” where physical description was recorded.
Of those incidents recorded with a political motivation, 66.5% demonstrated evidence of far-right convictions.
In other words, despite an increase of incidents from other ethnic groups/motivations, white people, and the far-right motivation remained the largest contributors of anti-Semitic attacks (where these attributes were recorded). Given the above set of statistics coupled with the seriously disconcerting rise of the far-right across Europe, (and an endemic increasing anti-Muslim sentiment), one would think a detailed analysis of the far-right groups, their links and groups, the “Christianist” influence which often comes with the such thinking, would be part of a piece on hate crime.
Oh dear. Gilligan’s anti-Muslim bias is here for the world to see.
In my previous piece on this topic, I noted the discriminatory treatment afforded to the Muslim minority in terms of the attacks against them. The propagandist actively downplayed attacks against Muslims. Thus non-violent attacks against the Jewish community were “pricks of insecurity”, whilst the same was dismissed by the bigoted hack as “not harmful”.
I also highlighted how, in Gilligan’s last attempt at suppressing anti-Muslim hate, he asked the head of Tell MAMA, whether reporting anti-Muslim incidents “played into an Islamist victim mentality”, thus propping the PREVENT strategy and assuming the false conveyor-belt theory of radicalisation as truth.
Would Gilligan like to ask the Zionist Jewish community whether such statistics play into the Zionist victim mentality, which drives a broader Zionist “grievance narrative”, which in turn whitewashes Israeli war crimes? Would Gilligan like to assert, as per the PREVENT Strategy, that this “victimhood mentality” feeds into a grievance narrative which makes young Jews disillusioned with anyone who opposes them, and then results them travelling to Palestine to perpetrate State terrorism?
No, I didn’t think so.
Hate crime is in unacceptable, regardless of who it is against. Weaponising stats to target a particular group is also a form of xenophobia which needs to be exposed when it occurs. Gilligan, in masking far-right, “white” crime whilst singling crimes perpetrated or linked to Muslims, and then downplaying anti-Muslim attacks, is guilty of this xenophobia. As a person holding a position in mass dissemination of information, he is perpetrating the very crime committed by the likes of Joseph Goebbels which made anti-Semitism acceptable amongst the Nazis: legitimising and supporting minority discrimination.